Adriane Carr speaks to the media before today's council meeting in Vancouver on February 12, 2013. Her lawyer, Jonathan Baker is on the left.Wayne Leidenfrost
/ PNG

Adriane Carr speaks to the media a Vancouver council meeting on February 12, 2013. Her lawyer, Jonathan Baker is on the left.wayne leidenfrost
/ PNG

The city manager's refusal to allow a motion to consider the risks to the city budget if the Vancouver Park Board continues with its planned reorganization was illegal and an abuse of power, said municipal lawyer Jonathan Baker at a press conference Tuesday. Baker was hired by Vancouver city councillor Adriane Carr, who submitted her motion last week. It was quashed by city manager Penny Ballem, on the grounds it would put the deal at risk.Wayne Leidenfrost
/ PNG

Green Party candidate Adriane Carr campaigns on Saturday, November 19, 2011 at Broadway and Granville in Vancouver.File
/ PNG

A day that began with fiery public criticism of Vancouver’s top city bureaucrat and her refusal to allow a motion on a planned reorganization of volunteer-run community centre associations ended with an apology Tuesday by the elected official who started it all.

“I think it is good to look at your behaviour and say, ‘Did I overstep bounds?’ and I think, perhaps, by specifically mentioning motive to the (city) manager’s emails to me that I might have overstepped that bound, and I apologize today,” said a contrite Green party Coun. Adriane Carr outside council chambers.

Earlier, Carr joined lawyer Jonathan Baker at a morning press conference outside city hall where they lashed out at city manager Penny Ballem.

Baker was hired by Carr, who submitted a motion before last week’s council meeting asking council to consider the risks to the city budget if the Vancouver park board continues with its controversial planned reorganization, especially if it leads to a drop in volunteer hours.

The motion was quashed by Ballem on the grounds it would put the deal at risk.

Baker, a former Non-Partisan Association councillor, called that refusal illegal and an abuse of power.

The city manager, a bureaucrat, has no authority to prevent a motion submitted by an elected councillor being placed on the agenda. To do so constitutes an abuse of duty, he said, adding the role of a city manager was that of a “butler” whose job is to pass issues along to council.

“Never in my experience, which is well over 50 years associated with local government, has anything like this happened,” Baker said.

He and Carr were also critical of Ballem’s suggestion the issue should be debated during an in camera session and not in public.

“This has already been placed in public by the park board,” Carr said.

Carr ramped up her criticism during a noon break of council when she told media she felt bullied by Ballem after receiving an email from the city manager recommending that she “think carefully” before discussing the motion in public.

“I am an elected city councillor. I have the right to be able to speak to issues that are of concern to constituents,” she said.

“I believe it needs to be in the public eye. To say it cannot be discussed is a bullying tactic and I will not succumb to that.”

Carr attempted twice to add the motion to the council agenda during its regular meeting Tuesday but was denied by Mayor Gregor Robertson.

Robertson said it was inappropriate for city council to involve itself in a park board business, and that public discussion could jeopardize sensitive and confidential negotiations with community centre associations regarding the proposed new operating model.

Carr challenged the decision, calling it “wrong.”

She agreed to apologize to Ballem, however, after it was noted by several Vision Vancouver councillors her comments were in contravention of the city’s code of conduct. The code prohibits council members from attacking or reflecting negatively on city staff or invoking staff matters for political purposes.

But she stood by her assessment it should not be up to Ballem, or any non-elected city staff member, to reject a motion.

“I have sought legal opinion and that legal opinion has confirmed my own reading of the bylaws which is that motion that I submitted in due process last week should have been on the agenda, at which point it could have been dealt with by the mayor to rule it out of order ... I may not like his ruling, but I accept that it is his authority to make that ruling. I absolutely believe that the city bylaws do not give that authority to the city manager,” she said.

The legal opinion and council drama comes the day after a public meeting at Hillcrest community centre, where six Vancouver community associations opposed to the plan vowed not to negotiate with the park board.

The new deal, if it passes, would see the park board pool $1.3 million in annual revenue collected by the city’s 20 volunteer-run community centres. The stated goal of the plan is to make the centres more equitable, and was approved by the park board on Feb. 6 after nine hours of heated debate.

Thirteen centres have agreed to negotiate with the park board on a deal, which would come into effect July 1. One has not indicated its position, and six are vehemently opposed.

Vancouver’s community centres are funded by the city, but individual centres fundraise extensively to support programming and equipment needs. Under the proposal, presented by park board general manager Malcolm Bromley, the efforts of fundraising and any matching funds or grants would remain under the control of the individual community centre associations.

The new deal would force the groups to hand surplus funds and facility-based revenue back to the park board for equitable redistribution. The proposal, including the funding model, remain subject to negotiation until July 1.

Five Vision Vancouver park board commissioners backed the deal and two NPA commissioners voted against it.

Comments

We encourage all readers to share their views on our articles and blog posts. We are committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion, so we ask you to avoid personal attacks, and please keep your comments relevant and respectful. If you encounter a comment that is abusive, click the "X" in the upper right corner of the comment box to report spam or abuse. We are using Facebook commenting. Visit our FAQ page for more information.

Almost Done!

Postmedia wants to improve your reading experience as well as share the best deals and promotions from our advertisers with you. The information below will be used to optimize the content and make ads across the network more relevant to you. You can always change the information you share with us by editing your profile.

By clicking "Create Account", I hearby grant permission to Postmedia to use my account information to create my account.

I also accept and agree to be bound by Postmedia's Terms and Conditions with respect to my use of the Site and I have read and understand Postmedia's Privacy Statement. I consent to the collection, use, maintenance, and disclosure of my information in accordance with the Postmedia's Privacy Policy.

Postmedia wants to improve your reading experience as well as share the best deals and promotions from our advertisers with you. The information below will be used to optimize the content and make ads across the network more relevant to you. You can always change the information you share with us by editing your profile.

By clicking "Create Account", I hearby grant permission to Postmedia to use my account information to create my account.

I also accept and agree to be bound by Postmedia's Terms and Conditions with respect to my use of the Site and I have read and understand Postmedia's Privacy Statement. I consent to the collection, use, maintenance, and disclosure of my information in accordance with the Postmedia's Privacy Policy.